Skip to main content

View Diary: Looks like Obama threads the needle (220 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Interesting approach. (22+ / 0-)

    In theory, it removes the religious objection all together.  Planned Parenthood seems to like it.

    "President Obama will be the most liberal President of our lifetime."

    by rashomon on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 08:09:38 AM PST

    •  If I supported the Church position (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      J M F, 6ZONite

      (which I most definitely don't) I don't see why this would make a difference.  Aren't the employers paying for all or part of the premiums for this insurance?

      If you start with the logic (again, with which I strongly disagree) that the Church should have no role in providing birth control benefits, I would argue that the premium payment means I'm playing a role.

      The GOP: "You can always go to the Emergency Room."

      by Upper West on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 09:36:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That was my reaction as well (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Upper West, 6ZONite

        I don't understand how this really addresses the issue.  The church will still pay the premiums to have these services available.  What are they really getting here?  That they won't have to inform new hires that they are entitled to these services?  

        How is the church no longer paying for their employees to obtain services they oppose?  Am I missing something?

        •  Ahh but it does address the issue (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          6ZONite, Upper West

          You see, if the church employees really don't use birth control - like the church has been claiming they don't - then none of them will ask the insurance company for the coverage, and that will in turn lower their premiums!

          Of course, the reality is that 98% of them DO use birth control, and so many will ask for the coverage - but that's an issue between the church and their employees, leaving Obama free and clear while still providing the coverage benefit.  If the church wants lower premiums, they'll have to get their employees to actually 'practice what they preach!'

          The argument will change from "Why is Obama forcing us to buy contraceptives?" to "Why are so many of our employees buying contraceptives?"

          Personally, I think it's brilliant.

          There are 10 kinds of people in the world, those who understand binary numbers, and those who don't.

          by j4k on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:51:08 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Paying the premiums (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mumtaznepal, wasatch, lina

          But remember, there's no additional cost to insurance companies because in the end it's cheaper for them to pay for contraception that it is for them to pay for a pregancy. From a strictly financial perspective, they want none of the women whom they insure to get pregnant, just as they want none of the people they insure to ever get sick. Insurance companies save money by paying for the pill, therefore the issue of the church paying the premiums doesn't arise. The church's premiums would actually go up if all their female employees went off birth control and got pregnant.

          The Bush Family: 0 for 4 in Wisconsin

          by Korkenzieher on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 11:54:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  at some point (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        marylrgn, Upper West, 6ZONite, Egalitare

        they have to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's...otherwise they'd have to live in isolation bubbles and not have any contact with the sinful world at all. They (the church admins) are such hypocrites.

        ~On, Wisconsin! On, Wisconsin! Raise her glowing flame!~ I am proud to say three generations of my family lived in WI. Though I live elsewhere, am with you in spirit!

        by sillia on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:04:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  but insurance coverage is part of an employee's (9+ / 0-)

        compensation, so it's really the employee's money buying the policy through their employer.

        It's ridiculous and stupid to have an insurance system run through employers in the first place. But here we are.

        •  Wasn't that also the case (0+ / 0-)

          under the old plan?  The insurers are always the ones paying for the birth control.  Even if the premiums are part of their compensation, they're still going to fund coverage for the dreaded pill.

          Isn't it worse from the Church perspective to look at it that way?  The government is forcing the Church to include as part of their compensation, payment of a premium that funds sinful treatments.

          Personally, I think this is a brilliant move by Obama, especially getting the nuns who actually run the hospital on board.  I'm relatively sure that the nuns were OK with the original policy, but were under pressure to support the Bishops.  This change gives them coverage even though it's a distinction without a difference.

          The GOP: "You can always go to the Emergency Room."

          by Upper West on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 11:17:55 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Since in alll likelihood (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Upper West, Catesby

        whichever insurance company the organization chooses to participate in also has many other employers/groups in the plan. Whether or not they allow contraceptives to be covered for their OWN employees, aren't they still in essence "paying" for SOMEBODY'S birth control pills?

      •  Nah. This is were the brilliance (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Bonsai66, james321

        is in this.  Everyone reacted to this as if it was a 50/50 tug of war between the government and employer, and one would win and one would lose.  I forgot, as I think most people except for the President did, that there was a THIRD party involved in this who had the greatest FINANCIAL interest at stake - the insurance companies.

        Insurance companies make more money by NOT paying for pregnancies.  Pregnancies cost insurance companies between $5,000 - $40,000 per birth.  Contraceptives average about $600 per year.  It's a profit based decision to fund the cheaper alternative and provide free contraceptives.  $600 per female employee is chump change to insurance companies.  They'll spread the minute cost or take it from their copy equipment budget.

        "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

        by Uncle Moji on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 12:05:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site